Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 680 (RAJ)

Ganesh Lal Bareth v. State of Rajasthan

2019-02-27

ALOK SHARMA

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. A copy of the petition be supplied to Mr. Pradeep Kalwana, Government Counsel. His name be shown in the cause list. 2. Heard on the interim relief. 3. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that in terms of the advertisement bearing No. 7/14-15 dated 12.1.2015, it was provided that the eligibility of the candidates for the post of Lecturer, College Education in various subjects would be determined as per the State Governments rules and regulations issued from time to time. He has submitted that the State Government in the Department of Education vide letter dated 21.2.2014 under the hand of the Principal Secretary, Higher Education to the Commissioner, College Education had provided that qualification laid down from time to time by the University Grants Commission would be relevant in the appointment process to the post of College Lecturers. Counsel submitted that the University Grants Commission has since the advertisement dated 12.1.2015 superseded the minimum qualifications for appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education Regulations 2010 by the UGCs corresponding Regulations of 2018 (hereafter the Regulations of 2018). Thereunder for appointment to the post of Asstt. Professor, the requirement of good academic record with 3 preceding qualifications prior to Masters Degree has been dropped. Counsel submitted that the petitioners have 55% marks at the post graduate level in the subject of Music-Vocal, for which they have applied for consideration for appointment as Asstt. Professors. It has been submitted that the petitioners also have the requisite NET / SLET qualifications and hence are eligible for being considered for appointment on the post of Asstt. Professors (Music-Vocal) pursuant to the recruitment therefor under the advertisement No. 7/2014-15 dated 12.1.2015, yet are not being so considered. 4. Mr. MF Baig appearing for RPSC, Mr. Neeraj Batra appearing for UGC and Mr. Pradeep Kalwania, appearing for the Department of Higher Education (all respondents in the writ petition) have submitted that the Regulation of 2018 have come into effect from 18th July, 2018. They are to be applied prospectively and cannot be given retrospectivity for recruitment of Asstt. Professors under the advertisement dated 12.1.2015. 5. Heard. Considered. 6. I am of the considered view that the counsel for the petitioners has been able to make out a prima-facie case. In view of the fact that interviews for the post of Asstt. They are to be applied prospectively and cannot be given retrospectivity for recruitment of Asstt. Professors under the advertisement dated 12.1.2015. 5. Heard. Considered. 6. I am of the considered view that the counsel for the petitioners has been able to make out a prima-facie case. In view of the fact that interviews for the post of Asstt. Professor (Music- Vocal) are to be held tomorrow, I would in the interim direct that the petitioners be provisionally considered at the interviews for the post of Asstt. Professor (Music/Vocal) subject to the outcome of the writ petition. However, the result of the petitioners not be declared without permission of the Court. 7. Put up after two weeks, as prayed.